If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Do you believe in "Trickle Down Economics"?

Trickle Down Economics is a terms coined in United States politics to refer to the idea that tax breaks or other economic benefits provided by government to businesses and the wealthy will benefit poorer members of society by improving the economy as a whole. First employed during the great depression and later implemented and made popular in the "Reagan Years" which overlapped with Reagan's economic policies called "Reaganomics" or "Laissez-fair or hands off government. It usually favors big business for the purpose of stimulating a proliferating job growth and industry. Some people claim that such a thing doesn't exist and that it is in place to give tax cuts to the rick like George Bush's Tax Cuts and the Fiscal Cliff. So what do you think is it real or just a myth to make the rich richer? Because apparently it worked during the Reagan years but its not working now.

Re: Do you believe in "Trickle Down Economics"?

It pretty much a bs to me. Everyone should pay the same amount of taxes, that will not be based on how much you earn. Lets say $200 per person, and that's it (the actual amount may be different, it's just an example). No benefits, no tax breaks. Taxing possibilities and not the effects.

Re: Do you believe in "Trickle Down Economics"?

Originally Posted by drknght

It pretty much a bs to me. Everyone should pay the same amount of taxes, that will not be based on how much you earn. Lets say $200 per person, and that's it (the actual amount may be different, it's just an example). No benefits, no tax breaks. Taxing possibilities and not the effects.

Re: Do you believe in "Trickle Down Economics"?

No civilian benefited from this policy, so no. The more govt. tries to alter the economy, the worse it gets, and the taxpayers will have to carry the burden.

And I heard 51% of the regular folks tax money goes to the military industrial complex. Not mentioning the 14 trillion dollars that somehow disappeared, the funding of Israel, sending out troops to every corner of the globe meddling with other country's political affairs...
If all that was diminished, the regular people wouldn't have to pay as much tax money as they do today.

Re: Do you believe in "Trickle Down Economics"?

Originally Posted by Shinobi Train

All I know is that when business is attacked and the wealthy have to pay higher taxes, the common people suffer. I'd say there must be some truth to it.

That's not trickle down economics. When the wealthy get higher taxes the common people thrive because the government is making more money, which means the housing market skyrockets(this is good), and loan interest goes down(this is good). That's what makes the economy thrive.

Trickle down economics is when the wealthy get tax breaks and somehow the poor can magically afford things. Basically I'm saying the **** doesn't work.

Re: Do you believe in "Trickle Down Economics"?

Originally Posted by Inanimated

That's not trickle down economics. When the wealthy get higher taxes the common people thrive because the government is making more money, which means the housing market skyrockets(this is good), and loan interest goes down(this is good). That's what makes the economy thrive.

Trickle down economics is when the wealthy get tax breaks and somehow the poor can magically afford things. Basically I'm saying the **** doesn't work.

:rofl: Okay, I don't debate anymore with people, I just state my opinion is all. I Just have to say that everyone always thinks their side is better, despite evidence to the contrary. Name a successful democrat president...or maybe just a successful democrat that has improved the economy in some small way. Don't worry, I'll wait. ^_^

God has no patience for heresyAnd lovers don't like otherswho deceive..

Re: Do you believe in "Trickle Down Economics"?

Originally Posted by Shinobi Train

:rofl: Okay, I don't debate anymore with people, I just state my opinion is all. I Just have to say that everyone always thinks their side is better, despite evidence to the contrary. Name a successful democrat president...or maybe just a successful democrat that has improved the economy in some small way. Don't worry, I'll wait. ^_^

Bill Clinton. No debate needed.
And what Republicans want to do now isn't exactly what Reagan had in mind either... I think it's a safe bet that if Reagan saw the way Republicans are now.. He'd roll over in his grave.. Multiple times.

Re: Do you believe in "Trickle Down Economics"?

Originally Posted by Ƒālconer

Trickle Down Economics is a terms coined in United States politics to refer to the idea that tax breaks or other economic benefits provided by government to businesses and the wealthy will benefit poorer members of society by improving the economy as a whole. First employed during the great depression and later implemented and made popular in the "Reagan Years" which overlapped with Reagan's economic policies called "Reaganomics" or "Laissez-fair or hands off government. It usually favors big business for the purpose of stimulating a proliferating job growth and industry. Some people claim that such a thing doesn't exist and that it is in place to give tax cuts to the rick like George Bush's Tax Cuts and the Fiscal Cliff. So what do you think is it real or just a myth to make the rich richer? Because apparently it worked during the Reagan years but its not working now.

There are multiple factors to be considered, and it's difficult to give a simple answer to this.

Business and economics, as a whole, tend to have greater endurance than most governments on the planet. Governments rise and fall and impose varying taxes and fees on businesses that operate in the region (and have been operating since before that government was recognized/formed).

So, yes, economics works. Money flows through the system without the government's involvement.

That said - tax cuts do not always mean an improved economy. The fact of the matter is that a lot of the money wealthy people 'save' in a tax cut ends up in a bank account. This is because they can literally survive off of the interest of their accounts and any of its earnings are taxed separately from their income (capital gains taxes are flat and affect the largest stock players to the stock tinkerers equally). In the debt/credit-heavy society we lived in through the early 2000s, this drove interest rates on accounts and made such investments very profitable. Thus "trickle down" was just not happening in the way the theory described (though the economic benefit from increased credit purchases was felt - though this was all part of the bubble that was developing and would later come back to bite us.... trickle-down didn't cause the bubble - but the bubble absorbed the 'trickle' and altered how it was distributed).

In economies more like today - "trickle down" works a little more effectively. Lending is not being driven nearly to the extremes it was - interest rates on accounts and in the stock market are fairly low and more 'normal' (closer to the mean economic growth). Savings transferred by tax cuts are invested more wisely - accounts don't offer nearly the interest rates they used to, the stock market is providing fewer short-term investment gains, and people are slowly shifting towards a preference for paying in full as opposed to on credit. The flow of "trickle" has been altered. It no longer goes straight into bank accounts or the stock market. It may sit in a bank account for a time - but as part of an intended cash purchase of a commodity.

Which isn't really 'helping' our economy in terms of returning it to its former 'glory' (which was riding a fractional reserve banking bubble... so it was all an illusion of grandeur, anyway). We are rebounding to a more stable and cautious economy. We won't (and hopefully never should) return to the same lending-based bubble-filled economy that we were enjoying.

That said - the "trickle" is there. The less money acquired by the government from our pay-checks, the more that can be spent in the economy (and the more eventually will be spent in the economy).

The government spends money, too - and its role in that should not be overlooked (governments, when properly executed, complement the free market). The problem is that our current government model wastes far too much money. Medicare is estimated to have spent over 100 billion dollars annually to fraudulent claims and other wasteful practices. That's something like 20x NASA's annual budget and 1/3 the cost of annual upkeep on our military (not counting active wars, which drive it up another 400 billion dollars).

I've seen where a lot of welfare ends up. It ends up in homes of people who, at best, sit around and wait for the check in the mail. More commonly, they appear to collect the check then run cash it so they can purchase their next hit of meth.

Which is why I am not supportive of the idea that the government should be entrusted with the responsibility of taking money from people and assigning its use to other people.

Pull the government out of business and get them back to a concept of minimal regulation and we'll see a lot of the mega-corporations fragment into smaller businesses with fewer executives and fewer bonuses. Smaller industries will take off and use innovation to forge new markets and exploit gaps in the current market supply. If "welfare" is given - it should be to businesses to help them afford to comply with environmental codes and alleviate start-up costs in industries where the costs of compliance are exceedingly high (which means that "only the big boys" can play in those industries - and when those same large companies control the lobbyists for government regulations... it's an obviously fascist system opposed to the idea of the free market).

In the end - the economy; the flow of wealth, is the flow of productivity. Taxes are, generally speaking, not an investment in production. Any purchase made by an individual for a good or service, however, is an investment in production. You cannot use the government to improve the wealth of any group through welfare. The only way to use the government to improve productivity is to use the government as a tool for the community it represents to help initiate business ventures that can produce new goods or services (that usually serve to improve the productivity of another group, business, etc).

Because the implication is that if trickle-down economics doesn't work... we are therefor justified and saying that a person should have more money taken away from him/her for "our" benefit. Which is, when you think about it, a form of pack-predation and theft. That person hasn't decided what their wage is (in most cases) - they merely accepted a wage offered to them that just so happened to be mind-bogglingly large. Now you want to come along and tell them that, because you don't have nice things - you deserve more of their income. If they don't - then you'll garnish their wages and/or send armed men to deny them of freedom and possibly property.

So I don't buy into this whole demonization of the wealthier classes, either. Nor do I buy into the idea that the government (or any group of people) owns or has privilege over another person's income. In other words - I don't believe that tax cuts can be said to 'cost' the government - that implies that the government owns your pay-check and is gracing you with the opportunity to freely spend it at their loss.

But, I think I've beat that horse to death. I am not a big fan of powerful governments.

Re: Do you believe in "Trickle Down Economics"?

Originally Posted by Shinobi Train

:rofl: Okay, I don't debate anymore with people, I just state my opinion is all. I Just have to say that everyone always thinks their side is better, despite evidence to the contrary. Name a successful democrat president...or maybe just a successful democrat that has improved the economy in some small way. Don't worry, I'll wait. ^_^

If by Democrat you mean a president with similar beliefs as the current Democratic party. Abraham Lincoln, Teddy Roosevelt, Bill Clinton. I'm missing several but I picked the strongest. By todays standards of a democrat Teddy and Abraham would both be modern Democrats.

I never provided an alternative to Trickle Down Economics, I simply stated it doesn't work at all. Trickle Down Economics literally has never worked, yet so many politicians try to pull numbers and facts out of no where. The only way Trickle Down Economics would work is if the Wealthy class went out and bought things rather than save the tax break. Now lets be honest, which wealthy human being would spend the money they get from a tax break(it would be a huge sum of money). The money will be locked in a bank and never seen for 20 years. That's the truth.

Re: Do you believe in "Trickle Down Economics"?

Originally Posted by Inanimated

If by Democrat you mean a president with similar beliefs as the current Democratic party. Abraham Lincoln, Teddy Roosevelt, Bill Clinton. I'm missing several but I picked the strongest. By todays standards of a democrat Teddy and Abraham would both be modern Democrats.

I never provided an alternative to Trickle Down Economics, I simply stated it doesn't work at all. Trickle Down Economics literally has never worked, yet so many politicians try to pull numbers and facts out of no where. The only way Trickle Down Economics would work is if the Wealthy class went out and bought things rather than save the tax break. Now lets be honest, which wealthy human being would spend the money they get from a tax break(it would be a huge sum of money). The money will be locked in a bank and never seen for 20 years. That's the truth.

Re: Do you believe in "Trickle Down Economics"?

Well my Economic Skills are low, all i know is: u cant Make money unless u juice it out of someone or something . . . . Most American Companies thrive cos of the cheap labor they obtain other countries like China . . . . also as far as I seem to understand Trickle Down Economics will not work ONLY when the Government is smart and judicious with the extra tax they get right? Well that a high expectation.......